VIJAY DIXIT Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was granted pre-arrest bail way back on 30.8.2005 and vide aforesaid order a condition was imposed upon the petitioner to deposit Rs.25 lacs i.e. half of the sale consideration by means of an FDR and the same was to be disbursed after the decision in the civil suit. According to the petitioner, he had deposited the aforesaid amount of Rs.25 lacs on 6.9.2005. Thereafter, the petitioner had filed Crl.M.C. No. 6795/2006 in October, 2006, and the said petition was withdrawn on 17.10.2006 with liberty to approach the trial court for reduction of the amount of FDR deposited.

(2.) In pursuance to the aforesaid order dated 17.10.2006, petitioner had filed an application for modification of the order dated 30.8.2005, stating that the condition of deposit of Rs.25 lacs is unreasonable and onerous and to state so, reliance was placed by the petitioner on judgments reported in 96 (2002) DLT 59 (SC) and 2006 (1) Crimes 168 (SC). Vide impugned order, learned Additional Sessions Judge has chosen not to rely upon the abovesaid judgments by observing that they are distinguishable on facts and has rejected petitioner's prayer for modification of the condition of deposit imposed, by observing that the petitioner had remained silent for a long time.

(3.) Both the sides have been heard and the record of this case has also been perused. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon judgments reported in 2006(1) Crimes 168 (SC); 96 (2002) Delhi Law Times 59 (SC) and (2004) 13 Supreme Court Cases 457, to contend that such an onerous condition could not have been imposed while granting pre-arrest bail to the petitioner and now the petitioner is seeking the waiver of the said condition, because he is not able to run his business.